Skip to content

Adversarial Detection for Pre-trained Classifiers via Lipschitz-Margin Analysis with Certification

Rui Zhang Xinle Cao Huazhen Yu Jian Liu Youwen Zhu
Oct 2026
Artificial Intelligence Machine Learning

Abstract

Deep classifiers deployed in safety-critical services like autonomous-driving perception remain vulnerable to small adversarial perturbations. Certified $\ell_2$ defenses today face a costly trade-off: randomized smoothing (RS) requires hundreds of noisy queries per input, while Lipschitz networks (LN) constrain the architecture and sacrifice clean accuracy. We take a detection-oriented approach instead: rather than certifying that predictions are invariant inside an $\ell_2$ ball, we certify that adversarial inputs within an $\ell_2$ ball are \emph{detected} --- a guarantee aligned with security-critical deployments where missing an attack is costlier than flagging a clean input. To realize this, we prove a Lipschitz-margin reduction from certified $\ell_2$ robustness to certified detection, which reduces the problem to handling a single Lipschitz constant $L$. We introduce two detector families: $\mathbb{D}_{Adv}$, which estimates $L$ from a single defender-side perturbed pair, and $\mathbb{D}_{lc}$, which augments that pair with a local margin centroid to keep the estimate above what the certificate requires. Both deploy on any pretrained classifier without retraining. With a valid global bound, the detector is fully certified at that radius; with a local estimate $L'$, certification is sample-wise and applies only when our certified condition holds. Across MNIST, CIFAR-10, and ImageNet-1k on four backbones (LeNet-5, VGG16, ResNet-50, ViT-B/16), our detectors match or outperform five baselines (CTT, SortNet, CRM, ContraNet, A$^2$D). For CIFAR-10 with 1-Lipschitz SortNet, our reduction delivers $100\%$ certified detection at the lowest FPR among compared certified detectors; on the standard CIFAR-10 VGG16, our detectors reject all evaluated in-budget adversarial examples, with 62-82\% both rejected and formally certified.

View source

Similar papers

#machine learning Review Open access Oct 2014

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

The results indicate that software engineering work practices are chosen opportunistically, adapted and configured to provide value under the constrains imposed by the startup context.

Nicolò Paternoster, Carmine Giardino, M. Unterkalmsteiner et al. · 394 citations · ⚡54

Diffusion models as plug-and-play priors

The possibility of inferring high-dimensional data inference in a model that consists of a prior and an auxiliary differentiable constraint given some additional information is considered, thereby allowing a range of potential applications in adapting models to new domains and tasks.

Alexandros Graikos, Esmeralda S. Whitammer, N. Jojic et al. · 316 citations · ⚡15

Trajectory Balance: Improved Credit Assignment in GFlowNets

It is proved that any global minimizer of the trajectory balance objective can define a policy that samples exactly from the target distribution, and empirically demonstrate the benefits of the trajectories balance objective for GFlowNet convergence, diversity of generated samples, and robustness to long action sequenc...

Esmeralda S. Whitammer, Moksh Jain, Emmanuel Bengio et al. · 302 citations · ⚡60
#artificial intelligence Open access May 2023

Evaluating the Performance of Large Language Models on GAOKAO Benchmark

GAOKAO-Bench is introduced, an intuitive benchmark that employs questions from the Chinese GAOKAO examination as test samples, including both subjective and objective questions that contribute a robust evaluation benchmark for future large language models and offers valuable insights into the advantages and limitations...

Xiaotian Zhang, Chun-yan Li, Yi Zong et al. · 216 citations · ⚡17

KTO: Model Alignment as Prospect Theoretic Optimization

This work proposes a HALO that directly maximizes the utility of generations instead of maximizing the log-likelihood of preferences, and suggests that the best loss depends on the inductive biases most appropriate for a given setting, an oft-overlooked consideration.

Kawin Ethayarajh, Winnie Xu, Niklas Muennighoff et al. · 195 citations · ⚡28

Related blog posts

MIT News · Artificial Intelligence Sep 29, 2026

Who we become when we talk to machines

Professor Sherry Turkle’s new book, “Artificial Intimacy,” offers a withering critique of chatbots and the antisocial dynamics she believes they encourage.

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.